Men today who want to save this nation hold up the United States Constitution as if by presenting a piece of parchment those holding the reigns of government will be induced to say, "Oh, I never thought of that. Here, let me lay down my guns and power at the 'feet' of that piece of paper." They attempt to rally an anesthetized nearly comatose populace to stand in allegiance to something that is perceived as only a mindless piece of paper that virtually none of them have read.
Since when did any amount of ink deposited on paper matter a whit to men whose only purpose in life was power and control? Did it accomplish anything for the American Indian to do that with the numerous treaties they had signed with the U. S.? Should it be considered a strange thing that this same government that systematically robbed the Native Americans of their land, now turns upon its own citizens robbing them of that commodity they consider most precious--personal liberty?
When does the common man learn that legal documents are never honored by men in the seats of power except when it appears that it will benefit them personally--or cause them harm if they do not? When are the terms of any treaty adhered to by anyone in ultimate authority? Only when more power, privilege or material gain are to be obtained by it. Any legal document is always and only for the "other guy", it is never a delineation of conduct for one's self.
Since long before the inception of John Locke's "Social Contract", the institution of written agreements, be they legal contracts or treaties between nations, served only the purpose of assuring that someone else was made to live up to his part of the bargain--by the use of force if necessary.
Some have expressed that the United States Constitution is God's idea of secular government. The grand idea of that document, if adhered to, would have made and kept America the greatest and most egalitarian nation in history. Given a probationary period of nearly two and a quarter centuries, the greatest experiment in human self-government has failed. Not a failure seen by the eyes of most, but certainly by any who would be willing to look beyond the heavy veil of false patriotism thrust in their faces to the reality of a nation that exists only to serve those governing her.
Abraham Lincoln once said, in effect, that when a nation's government no longer hears the voice of its citizens and fails to respond to the true needs of the governed, it is the right and duty of those citizens to rise up and, by force of armed rebellion, if necessary, throw off the yoke of tyranny. The problem with Mr. Lincoln's advice is that the citizenry must first be aware that they are wearing the chains of bondage. Those who, in this age, have forged those chains have done so with a consummate skill in the art of subterfuge and legal deception. They have done this with such competence that this populace knows not that they are bound more firmly with the chains of lies and artfully framed truths than they could ever be were their bonds visibly real and material. After all, one must at least be aware of the methods of their enslavement before they could actually recognize the fact of it. There are none so firmly bound than those who are truly convinced that they desire what their masters desire. Charles Manson once made the insightful comment from his prison cell that all one must do to be free is not to desire to be anywhere else than where he is. That statement is a concise summation of the most effective kind of slavery. The masters have convinced us that we really do want the results of the mountain of useless legislation they've heaped upon us. With such an immense and convoluted legal structure as has been created in this nation, there is little option available to the common man but to believe and accept the stated reason for its creation--and the subservience it creates in its wake.
When did the systematic dismantling of that most wonderful of manmade governmental documents actually begin? If one were to ignore the bold contradiction to the Bill of Rights that came in the form of selectively applying its precepts to white males--excluding blacks, native Americans and many others--a case could be made that the first real breach in constitutional solidarity occurred in 1893 when the first amendment was openly violated. To the casual observer the "hole in the dike" was small indeed and inconsequential, but to one closely scrutinizing the true import of the occurrence, it was indeed ominous.
During the Columbian Exposition of 1892-3, celebrating the four- hundredth anniversary of the discovery of America by Christopher Columbus, the federal government granted five-million dollars for an exhibit. Various influential church organizations then pressured Congress to make the grant conditional on the provision that the World's Fair be closed on Sunday out of respect for the Sabbath. Congress subsequently passed a bill declaring in its wording "the first day of the week commonly called Sunday" as "the Christian Sabbath," "the Sabbath of the nation," which should be honored by shutting the Fair on Sunday.
Never mind that the only Biblical references to the Sabbath set forth the seventh day as such. Never mind that the first amendment to the Constitution states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." The religious wording is actually in the congressional record declaring that Sunday is the "Christian Sabbath" of a nation that claims to make no laws or restrictions based on religious beliefs.
A U.S. Congressman introduced a bill to repeal that bit of legislation as a clear violation of the first amendment. He argued clearly, precisely and eloquently of the danger of allowing it continue unredressed--as seamless and airtight an argument as has ever been presented to that body. The bill was never allowed out of committee. The reason? It was stated by the chairman that those who drafted the bill closing the World's Fair on the "Christian Sabbath" knew what they were doing--and, therefore, it must be all right. Now there is certainly sound intellectual reasoning for trashing the Constitution! One cannot help but wonder with the mentality displayed by the aforementioned congressional chairman, how our nation and its constitution has lasted as long as it has.
From that time till now the Constitution has been under constant assault and erosion by those whose political and religious agenda makes room for only their ideas of how it should be interpreted.
There have been absolutely accurate indicators throughout history that always foreshadow the demise of a nation. Those indicators were present in every great civilization, Babylon, Greece, Rome etc., and they are all present and accounted for in this nation. America, the country whose citizens, like all others before it, cannot believe there could possibly be an end to "the land of the free and the home of the brave." Can we not ask ourselves what sort of magic insulation envelopes this nation that it can so callously violate every law of righteousness and decency that God has uttered and still be immune to His judgments? How is it that every nation in history that has reached this point of debasement and very soon thereafter ceased to exist, be so arrogant as to think it will not happen to us?
Any time in history a people have been taxed and burdened with a tangled maze of laws to the extent Americans are now; whenever a nation has begun to "rent out" its military in a mercenary fashion as has the U.S. under the United Nations; whenever an empire has so thoroughly absorbed itself in mindless pastime activities; when any empire has induced its people to the compromise and surrender of their God-given liberty of mind and conscience to accept the proffered bait of "peace and safety", there has always followed a quick almost apocalyptic decease. "For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape." 1 Thessalonians 5:3
Disclaimer: APFN is not responsible for the accuracy of
material on 'The Winds'
and does not necessarily endorse the views expressed within their web pages.
This page is in the public domain.